contract law case study 1 answers
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Centennial College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
MISC
Subject
Law
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
2
Uploaded by DeanOwlPerson809
Answer the following questions:
1.
Was there evidence that the Banquet Hall was being unreasonable? Why or why not?
-
Indeed, there is significant evidence that the Banquet Hall acted unreasonable, which is essential under contract law. The incident fits the definition of "breach of contract." Failure to honour a reservation is a breach of contract, according to the legal notion. In this case, due to John's
health issues, John and Julie encountered unexpected events that prevented them from meeting the initial contract requirements. Showeresire
to reschedule the wedding and replace it with another event, a Bridal Shower, shows a fair endeavour to amend the contract to accommodate unexpected changes. The Banquet Hall's solid rejection to accept this proposal appears to be against the legal idea of "good faith," which requires contract parties to act reasonably and fairly.
2.
What recourse does the couple have to the lawsuit considering they made a change to the initial contract, but offered solutions to the potential problem?
-
In accordance with contract law principles, it's critical to examine how the couple's planned change corresponds with legal norms. In this case, John and Julie attempted to amend the original contract owing to John's health difficulties, which is known as a "contractual modification." They not only requested that the wedding be postponed, but they also offered to rebook the reception and include an additional event, the Bridal Shower, which would have resulted in an additional $8,000 in income for the Banquet Hall.
This plan shows a readiness to perform contractual responsibilities in the face of unexpected circumstances, which reflects a fair and ethical attitude.
As a result, the Banquet Hall's unwillingness to accept the suggested change raises questions regarding its commitment to contract law principles and the duty to act in good faith. Therefore, the couple is more ethical and reasonable in this situation.
3.
What do you think will happen when it gets to court?
-
When this matter goes to court, a number of aspects, including the particulars of the contract, local contract law, and the facts and arguments brought up by both parties, will determine the conclusion. The court may consider the fairness of the Banquet Hall's denial and John & Julie’s genuine attempts to negotiate an agreement if the contract does not specifically address delay due to unexpected events. It is difficult to determine an accurate decision without knowing all of the legal arguments and information, but a court may decide in support of the couple, maybe ordering the refund of the deposit or a fair modification of the contract conditions. It makes it hard to predict the specific outcome.
4.
If you were the judge, how would you rule in this case?
-
As a judge, I would carefully analyze the terms of the contract and determine if they specified a simple procedure for delay or modification due
to unexpected circumstances. I would take into consideration the John and Julie’s willingness to negotiate in an honest way if the contract did not address such scenarios and there were no specific restrictions on adjustments. If the Banquet Hall's rejection seemed unfair, I may decide in favor of the couple, asking them to get their $10,000 deposit back or resolving the terms of the contract to make it more suitable for them. However, the particular legal arguments and details made during the trial would determine the outcome.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help